Senate Passes Keystone XL Pipeline Bill Today,

After 6 years of Obama ramrodding liberal socialist designed, butt kissing pandering to contributors, it will feel good to have one of the most economy enhancing measures of his 6 year debacle shoved up his duffle bag with an overridden veto.
The Senate on Thursday passed a bill to force approval of the controversial Keystone XL oil pipeline, which President Obama is certain to veto in his first official clash with the new Republican-majority Congress.

The five-year fight over the Keystone pipeline has become a proxy symbol for far broader fights over climate change, energy and the economy, and for the conflict between Mr. Obama and congressional Republicans.

When Republicans won control of the Senate late last year, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the new majority leader, chose the Keystone bill as the first measure Republicans would send to Mr. Obama.

The White House promptly declared that Mr. Obama would veto the measure — which would force the approval of a proposed 1,179-mile oil pipeline from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico — in a stroke of the pen that is expected to be the opening shot in a series of vetoes of Republican measures.

The Senate voted 62 to 36 in favor of building the pipeline.

Passage of the Senate bill sends the measure back to the House, which passed a largely similar bill earlier this month. House leaders are still deciding whether to simply pass the Senate bill as it is, or to hold a conference merging the House and Senate bills into a new bill, which would then be voted on by each chamber.


Obama Budget Proposes 7% More in Spending Above Sequestration Caps

President Barack Obama will propose government spending that is 7%--or $74 billion--over caps he and congressional Republicans agreed to in a bipartisan deficit-reduction deal three years ago, a White House official said Thursday.

Mr. Obama's fiscal 2016 budget, due to be released Monday, will propose some $561 billion in defense spending and $530 billion in non-defense spending, the official said.

The amounts exceed the levels set under the 2011 budget law by $38 billion for defense and $37 billion for nondefense, the official said.

"American Sniper" hero commented on Obama a few weeks before his death.

Clint Eastwood’s biopic "American Sniper" movie about Chris Kyle, the deadliest sniper in U.S. military history has not only been a smash success at the box office, but has become something of a cultural phenomenon across the country, sparking all kinds of debates and conversations on social media.

The movie seems to have cemented Chris Kyle’s place in the hearts of conservatives, making him a hero to many who love our country, our freedom, and the men and women in uniform who sacrifice so much to defend both.

Just several weeks before he died, Kyle gave a video interview which includes a rather timely warning about Obama and his hatred for the Second Amendment.

Where have all our hero's gone??

'President Costanza’s Jobs Boom'

The Wall Street Journal has an editorial today that’s right on the money when it comes to job growth in 2014. In short, as we noted the other day, much of it happened because unemployment benefits were not extended. Don’t pay people not to work, and they’ll go out and find work.  (See following articles)

In a 1994 “Seinfeld” episode, George realizes that “every decision that I have ever made in my entire life has been wrong. My life is the complete opposite of everything I want it to be.” Jerry replies: “If every instinct you have is wrong, then the opposite would have to be right.”

So Costanza approaches a gorgeous woman in the coffee shop and announces, “My name is George. I’m unemployed and I live with my parents.” To his surprise, she’s interested. He lands a job with the Yankees after insulting George Steinbrenner.

Maybe President Obama ought to take Jerry’s advice too

That’s our reading of a striking new economic study that examines Congress’s decision to zero out extra unemployment benefits last year.

The authors find that this abrupt policy shift created some 1.8 million jobs, or slightly more than three of five net positions filled in 2014. The cuts also pulled a million workers who dropped out of the labor force back into the workplace. This reality happens to be the opposite of what Mr. Obama and other liberal welfare state lovers predicted.

It’s not always so immediately obvious when a policy shift changes results, but this time it’s pretty unmistakable. 

Short, accurate and disturbing. There is no FREE Lunch. Sorry !!!

Consider the article below within the context of the video message you just viewed.
It is fricking amazing how fast you can find a job when the unemployment stop !!!


Sixty percent of job creation in 2014 was caused by the expiration of unemployment benefits, according to a new working paper published by the National Bureau of Economic Research.

In late 2013, a standoff between Republicans and Democrats led to the abrupt expiration of long-term unemployment benefits. Democrats warned that the expiration would have disastrous ramifications, but Republicans had long argued that allowing Americans to collect unemployment benefits for an indefinite period of time provided a disincentive for them to work.

The new new working paper found that the expiration of benefits was responsible for the creation of over 1.8 million jobs. Nearly 1 million of those jobs were created by workers who would have otherwise stayed out of the labor force if unemployment benefits had been extended. Overall, almost 3 million jobs were created in 2014

“The negative effects of unemployment benefit extensions on employment far outweighs the potential stimulative effects often ascribed to this policy,” the study said.

It found that "the dominant impact of the benefit cut on employment was not driven by a contraction in the labor force —unemployed dropping out of the labor force because they were no longer entitled to benefits — but instead by those previously not participating in the labor market deciding to enter the labor force."

The study was coauthored by Marcus Hagedorn of the University of Oslo, Iourii Manovskii of the University of Pennsylvania and Kurt Mitman of Stockholm University.

The authors found that employment grew fastest in states that had high unemployment benefits before benefit extensions expired. This suggests that high unemployment benefits had been holding back job creation in these states, causing them to catch up quickly once benefits fell closer to those in low-benefit states.

The average duration of unemployment insurance fell suddenly from 53 weeks to 25 weeks in late December 2013. The federal Emergency Unemployment Compensation program had been extending the typical duration of unemployment benefits during the Great Recession.

The study gives ammo to conservatives who argue that welfare benefits for able-bodied adults encourage people to live off government handouts instead of seeking work. Only 62.7 percent of civilians are members of the labor force, the lowest rate since 1978. Participation was even lower prior to women joining the labor force at accelerated rates in the 1970s.

Labor force participation is down three percentage points since President Obama took office in 2009. It has fallen only 0.1 percentage points since unemployment benefits were cut in December 2013.

An excellent history lesson in two minutes.

Fifty years ago this Saturday, former British prime minister Winston Churchill died at age 90.  If you read this short history of this hero, as I did, you will experience a weird feeling in the pit of your stomach bseecau your mind can't help to compare this man to the vacuum of character, patriotism, courage and competence we have experienced since the age of Obama began.  Thank God it is nearly over!

The Last Lion Remembered 
Winston Churchill never once flinched in the face of the Third Reich. 

The Commander-in- Wimp folding again.

                                        Blinking on Korean Sanctions
24   -2015  Wall Street Journal

The Obama Administration has a penchant for talking tough on sanctions while following
through with little. The prime example is Iran, and now the pattern may repeat with North Korea.

Washington this month responded to North Korea’s cyberattack on Sony Pictures by sanctioning 10 individuals and three entities tied to Pyongyang, including its Reconnaissance general Bureau, known as Unit 586 and believed to oversee Kim Jung Un ‘s cyberwarfare squads. “This step,” said the White House, “reflects the ongoing commitment of the United States to hold North Korea accountable for its destabilising, destructive and repressive actions, particularly its efforts to undermine US cybersecurity and intimidate US businesses.”

Yet the intelligence bureau and two trading firms blacklisted were already under US sanctions for involvement in Pyongyang’s weapons programmes and other illicit activities. So the new measures are “pretty light and symbolic at best,” said former CIA director Michael Hayden.

By contrast, Washington’s 2005 sanctions on Macau-based Banco Delta Asia forced a cascade of banks to cut ties with North Korea, imperiling Pyongyang’s access to military equipment and luxury goods. “These sanctions,” said Hayden, “are not that.”

The best that can be said is that the new measures have potential, if implemented aggressively. The US Treasury and State Departments now have the “flexibility” to target any North Korean official or agency, along with “any individual or entity who is providing them, in turn, material support,” said Treasury official Daniel Glaser last week.

Yet the target list remains short and redundant. As sanctions expert Joshua Stanton asked, “Are Kim Jung Un’s billions in overseas assets blocked now, or only after State and Treasury get around to deciding that he’s an official of the North Korean government?”

Though it runs a slave state of 23 million people, the Kim regime isn’t under the US human-rights sanctions covering Burma, Congo and Zimbabwe. Nor is it designated a “primary money-laundering concern” under the Patriot Act, a la Burma and Iran, despite its leading role in currency counterfeiting and methamphetamine trafficking. Thanks to a Bush Administration blunder, Pyongyang was taken off the US terror-sponsor list in 2008, even as it maintains ties to Iran and Syria.

Returning North Korea to that list would trigger a range of export and financial sanctions and demonstrate US seriousness. So would designating North Korea a primary money-laundering concern, as urged by the North Korea Sanctions Enforcement Act, which passed the House last year and will soon be reintroduced by Republican Ed Royce and Democrat Eliot Engel. Any bank doing business with a North Korean entity would then risk exclusion from the US financial system – the sanction that caused a run on Banco Delta Asia in 2005 and spurred others to drop their North Korean accounts until the US relented a year later.

Treasury’s Glaser appeared to endorse the Banco Delta Asia model in Congressional testimony last week, yet he also acknowledged that major Chinese banks still conduct business with sanctioned entities such as Korea Kwangson Bank. Glaser also wouldn’t say whether North Korea should be labeled a primary money-laundering concern.

If the Obama Administration plans to oppose the Royce-Engel legislation, as it has several Iran sanctions bills, then North Korea has little to worry about.  

What our President still does not understand is that  wimping out on sanctions will only invite further aggression from Kim Jung Un. As Mike Huckabee says, "The only way to get rid of a bully is to put a fist in his face and his butt on the ground."

A little pearl from internet babble !

"It is perhaps liberalism’s most grating rhetorical trick: deliberately conflating small and important truths about local community and family with large new federal initiatives. This bait-and-switch is the very heart of Obamaism. Obama talks about unity and community as if they have anything -- and everything! -- to do with initiatives from Washington. Remember when he explained why we need to raise taxes? Because it would be “neighborly.” The “Life of Julia” was nothing more than an argument for the federal government to replace the functions once performed by family and community. His most recent push to make community college “free” while raising taxes on college-savings plans perfectly illustrates his hostility to the idea that other institutions should take the lead instead of the federal government."

Joe from Columbine on point again !!

Here  is my first reaction regarding our presidents' electing to participate in a one hour interview, in order to promote his sick agenda, with a second rate comedienne. 

 I find it AMAZING...and amazingly stupid, insulting and classless!  Only a Narcissist of the highest order would so shamelessly despoil the office of our Presidency!  This "it's all about me" jerk is so self infatuated that he believes he can get away with behaving in any manner whatsoever, without any consequence.
What an insult to our black citizens, who already are finding it difficult to elevate their status within our society.  Instead of encouraging our young black citizenry to develop the competencies and habits necessary to excel in life he opts to give credence to an "being Gangsta, Hip-Hop and irreverent" is an acceptable goal to pursue.  GloZell is the epitome of what ails the American black community.  To be given credence by our president is a tragedy.


Power Play video

Republican strategist Ed Pozzuoli and liberal talk radio star Garland Nixon join Power Play host Chris Stirewalt to discuss the president’s problem selling his Iran plan and other foreign policy woes
                                                          Click HERE

Modeling his rose colored glasses.

                              OBAMA’S COMEBACK CUT SHORT
Just a few weeks ago, the sun was shining again in Obamaland. The economy was crawling out of its six-year funk, thanks in large part to cheap gasoline,  (in spite of Obama's war on fossil fuel) liberals were pumped up about executive action on immigration, no one else had died of Ebola and the press and public were swooning over Cuba.  A conventional wisdom, that had concluded just a month ago that President Obama was a failure, scampered right   past “comeback kid” and ran all the way to “conquering hero.” The seeming conclusion was that if only the country could have seen January, November would have looked completely different. And then wham!,  everything started to fall apart overseas again.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s planned trip Thursday was booked by Congress and  the White House said President Barack Obama would not meet the prime minister when he comes to the U.S. to address a joint session of Congress.  There were suggestions that he had a tee-time booked with some sought out celebrities. 

Then  things really started to fall apart.  Starting with the audacious raid on a Paris magazine in broad daylight by Islamist militants.  And continuing today with horrifying headlines about the collapse of the Western slightly frienly government in Islamist-benighted Yemen, The strong sense  is that the struggle between Islamists and the West has taken a strong turn for the worse.

 News that the king of America’s problematic but indispensable ally, Saudi Arabia, had died stoked new fears about unrest in the region. The mortal enemies of the House of Saud, the Shi’a theocrats of Iran, are probing for weakness everywhere and cutting new military deals with yet another hostile power, Russia. And as for the U.S.-led effort to contain the barbarous wannabe caliphs of ISIS, it would appear that things are getting worse, not better.

And, here we are again, going into a foreign relations Superbowl...led by a Quarterback with under inflate balls !

Take a breather and read Ben Stein's diary from last Tuesday.

This has been a busy time. A few days ago, I flew up to Calgary, Alberta to appear on a panel to talk about the price of oil. The audience was about 1300 Chartered Financial Analysts. My flight up was uneventful except that the food on Air Canada Rouge was literally inedible. The first class was strange, too. It was just coach with the middle seat roped off. But the seats were still coach-sized.

My seatmate was an incredibly pleasant young athlete, just as kind as he could be. A genuine delight of a young man. I was met at the gate after a blissfully short flight by a rain thin black African man. He was from Congo. He had also lived in Burundi and now he lives in Calgary.

Canada is making mighty efforts to become multi-ethnic. Just what the rationale is here, I do not know. I do know that Calgary has foreign-born men and women manning almost every waiter’s station, reception desk, and snack bar. Is there really a huge labor shortage in Canada? I guess so. I would tell you that I particularly dig the beautiful Asian girls, but then some blue stocking would write to me and complain. So, let’s just say it was all pretty cool and I loved my panel.

No one knows why oil dropped so far so fast. The supply situation — lots of new shale oil coming on stream, for months if not years. The demand situation has not changed at all. Saudi Arabia and OPEC declined to cut production to support a price near $100 a barrel. But they never said they would support the price of oil. And in any event, world oil consumption is so immense that even if the Saudis cut production by a million barrels a day, the cut would mean roughly 1 percent of demand. So, then why did oil — facing small increases in supply and at most a slowing in demand — suddenly fall by about 55 percent?

There is only one answer that I see: the traders make billions on a downward move of that size. They are the only ones capable of affecting the price who make money off a fall. So, it has to be the traders. That’s been my experience with commodities always: when sudden moves occur without real world causes, look to see who benefits. The traders. Not Saudi Arabia. Not Exxon-Mobil. The traders. And at the right time for them, when everyone is saying low oil is here to stay, they’ll float rumors of a shortage and move it up again. T

However, I could be wrong. Figuring out commodities prices is a fool’s game unless you can rig them — and the traders can and do.  Never mind.

I flew home on Friday after a simply great lunch at a cafĂ© in Calgary called “Earl’s.” Great food and great service. Excellent teriyaki chicken. Beautiful waitresses, but I am not allowed to notice.

Tonight, Alex and I watched Mr. Obama’s SOTU speech. It was great. Give everyone free day care. Who pays for it? Where do they find enough qualified day-care workers? Where do they train them?

Everyone gets free education. Wait. Isn’t public education up through high school already free? And the ones who need it most, the blacks and Hispanics, drop out at terrifying rates. Who will make them stay in school and do their homework? Who pays for this? And where do the teachers come from?

He promises free goodies to the non-rich, and that’s fine, but who will pay for it? Or does he just add to the deficit? I guess he does. I keep thinking, “Panem et circenses” — and free day care. Endless gifts from Uncle Sam's endless bounty! That’s his program for all of his voters.

Mr. Obama just does not get that many of the people who really need to acquire human capital — blacks and Hispanics — resist acquiring it at any price.

This country has plenty of opportunities. It just does not have enough ambitious, hard-working young people. Hey, maybe that’s what Canada’s immigration policy is all about.… Maybe we should take in ten million Asians.…

My favorite part of the speech, though, was about how he wants to make a kinder, gentler politics in America. He sticks it to the Republicans any chance he gets, attacks the police, mocks law enforcement, and then he gets all hissy when anyone criticizes him. And what’s with him comparing anti-Semitism and discrimination against transgenders? I love transgenders. They are super cool. But when was there a Holocaust against them? The two victim groups have little in common. And what’s with Obama and the Gay Marriage thing? He says the fight is all over. If that’s true, why is he bringing it up? If that’s true, why is the Supreme Court hearing a case about it? I love gay people. Almost everyone I know is gay. But why is Mr. Obama so obsessed with them if their fight is won? And why is he bragging about the U.S. pulling out of Afghanistan? Usually losing a war is not a cause for celebration. Everywhere we look, the terrorists are on the ascendant and civilization is in retreat. So, what is Obama crowing about? Is he really as blind as he acts or is he just stating a preference about the outcome? Why is he unable to use the phrase “Islamist terror”? Does he think the Islamic State likes him if he uses weasel words?

He is just so incredibly sorry as a leader. Bragging about LGBT triumphs as all of Europe trembles at Islamic terror and the whole Middle East except for Israel and Egypt (which he dislikes) falls into chaos. What is wrong with him? He has lost sight of what’s real and what is important. He looks extremely tired. Maybe he isn’t well.

Still, I sure would not want to be him, and have to answer to his constituency. Hard to please, aren’t they, Mister President? To think that civilization rests on a reed such as Barack Obama: terrifying.

You have all seen it......but in case you missed it:

The main stream media Obama cult broadly praised President Obama’s sixth state of the union address last night as a “confident” and “ambitious” speech. But even his traditional allies in the press could not ignore the fact that it was a confident speech completely disconnected from the real world. 

Here is NBC's Andrea Mitchell, the network’s senior foreign policy correspondent, on last night’s speech: "I think that on foreign policy, his projection of success against terrorism and against ISIS, in particular, as I said, is not close to reality."

Chris Matthews, the adoring Obama supporter who once said Mr. Obama’s charisma made him feel “this thrill going up my leg,” commented after last night’s speech, "I keep thinking tonight that there is a world out there that he didn’t really talk about.” That’s putting it gently.

Richard Engel, NBC’s chief foreign correspondent, delivered the most devastating analysis of the President’s claims:
“It seems that the rose-colored glasses through which [President Obama] was viewing the foreign policy were so rose-colored that they don’t even reflect the world that we’re living in...ISIS is doing very well, and the strategy is completely disjointed...To sell that as a success, I think was missing the point, maybe even disingenuous.”

Engel elaborated:
“It sounded like the President was outlining a world that he wishes we were all living in but is very different from the world [described in the news], with terror raids taking place across Europe, with ISIS very much on the move. One thing the President said was that ‘American leadership, including our military power, is stopping ISIL’s advance.’ That just isn’t the case...”

“He talked about building support for the moderate Syrian opposition. That effectively isn’t happening. There is no real support for the moderate Syrian opposition. In fact, one military official told me that they are calling the moderate Syrian opposition the ‘unicorn’ because they have not been able to find it. So there was a general tone, maybe even suspended disbelief, I think when he started talking about foreign policy. There’s not a lot of success stories to be talking about in foreign policy right now.”

Even senior members of the President’s own party have been unable to stomach some of the President’s claims. Democratic Senator Bob Menendez, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, this morning described the President’s quotes on Iran as “sound[ing] like talking points that come straight out of Tehran.”

What was striking about President Obama's speech was his inability to describe radical Islamism as a movement.

He continues to focus on geography instead of ideology. He refers only to “violent extremism."

He continues to bounce from terror group to terror group as though they’re distinct threats. The current conversation is about ISIL (or ISIS) in Northern Syria and Iraq.

The President failed to mention Boko  however, which last year killed more people in Nigeria (10,000) than Ebola did in all of Africa (8,000). To her credit, Senator Joni Ernst, in a very short reaction speech, did mention Nigeria as a trouble spot.

Ironically, the front pages of today's newspapers report the State of the Union on one side and the battle in the capital of Yemen on the other side. Yemen is a country President Obama had cited as a model of how we are making progress against “violent extremists”. Today the Yemeni president “cannot leave his house,” according to the Associated Press, because Islamist rebels are holding him “captive” in his home. The country got no mention last night.

The state of the union, on national security matters at least, is a disaster. A president who tries to hide from the threats we face--or worse, to construct his own world in which they don’t exist--is making the planet a much more dangerous place. One with “confidence” disconnected from reality isn’t showing leadership. He’s showing pure foolishness.  THIS IS WHERE THE "MORON" THING BECOMES ON POINT.

Why Obama Gave The Speech.

Like being buried alive.

I suspect a good number of our buddies who might get their news feed from DishTV suffered the same as I during the FoxNews vs. Dish TV squabble which saw a blackout of Fox News on that carrier.  Living in the middle of a National Forest with no wired Comcast-like carrier I was sentenced to main stream media for about a month,  I had already checked out the cost and hassle it would take to switch to Direct TV satellite....when finally FoxNews came back to life on DishTV.

The month I spent slogging through NBC, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, Newsmx, Blaze, ad.infinitum  interesting at best....but at the same time, like being in a barren wasteland of pseudo jounalistic college students.  Even Chris Matthews was using a softball any time he would interview a liberal guest.  CNN does pretty good with "on the spot" events but politically the are just more pocket pawns for the populist politicos.  Even their "reporting on the scene" had them struggling behind the happenings time-line on a number of occasions in the Parisian escapades of the last couple weeks.

It is great to get back to "Fair and Balanced".  It was sickening to all of a sudden find yourself in
the midst of the inane amateurism world of soft jounalism and liberal leaning reporting.  Glad it is over!  But, I remain a bit hungover from the experience and will recover soon,  I still watch the "farm teams" play...but there is nothing like the pros.


Check out the reality for this person: 
I'm a 54 year old consulting engineer and make between $60,000 and $125,000 per year, depending on how hard I work and whether or not there are work projects out there for me.

My girlfriend is 61 and makes about $18,000 per year, working as a part-time mail clerk.

For me, making $60,000 a year, under ObamaCare, the cheapest, lowest grade policy I can buy, which also happens to impose a $5,000 deductible, costs $482 per month.

For my girlfriend, the same exact policy, same deductible, costs $1 per month. That's right, $1 per month. I'm not making this up.

Don't believe me? Just go to , the ObamaCare website for California and enter the parameters I've mentioned above and see for yourself. By the way, my zip code is 93940. You'll need to enter that.

So OK, clearly ObamaCare is a scheme that involves putting the cost burden of healthcare onto the middle and upper-income wage earners. But there's a lot more to it. Stick with me.

And before I make my next points, I'd like you to think about something:

I live in Monterey County, in Central California. We have a large land mass but just 426,000 residents - about the population of Colorado Springs or the city of Omaha.

But we do have a large Hispanic population, including a large number of illegal aliens, and to serve this group we have Natividad Medical Center, a massive, Federally subsidized county medical complex that takes up an area about one-third the size of the Chrysler Corporation automobile assembly plant in Belvedere, Illinois (see Google Earth View). Natividad has state-of-the-art operating rooms, Computed Tomography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging, fully equipped, 24 hour emergency room, and much more. If you have no insurance, if you've been in a drive-by shooting or have overdosed on crack cocaine, this is where you go. And it's essentially free, because almost everyone who ends up in the ER is uninsured.

Last year, 2,735 babies were born at Natividad. 32% of these were born to out-of-wedlock teenage mothers, 93% of which were Hispanic. Less than 20% could demonstrate proof of citizenship, and 71% listed their native language as Spanish. Of these 876 births, only 40 were covered under [any kind of] private health insurance. The taxpayers paid for the other 836. And in case you were wondering about the entire population - all 2,735 births - less than 24% involved insured coverage or even partial payment on behalf of the patient to the hospital in exchange for services. Keep this in mind as we move forward.

Now consider this:

If I want to upgrade my policy to a low-deductible premium policy, such as what I had with my last employer, my cost is $886 per month. But my girlfriend can upgrade her policy to the very same level, for just $4 per month. That's right, $4 per month. $48 per year for a zero-deductible, premium healthcare policy - the kind of thing you get when you work at IBM (except of course, IBM employees pay an average of $170 per month out of pocket for their coverage).

I mean, it's bad enough that I will be forced to subsidize the ObamaCare scheme in the first place. But even if I agreed with the basic scheme, which of course I do not, I wouldnever agree to subsidize premium policies. If I have to pay $482 a month for a budget policy, I sure as hell do not want the guy I'm subsidizing to get a better policy, for less that 1% of what I have to fork out each month for a low-end policy.

Why must I pay $482 per month for something the other guy gets for a dollar? And why should the other guy get to buy an $886 policy for $4 a month? Think about this: I have to pay $10,632 a year for the same thing that the other guy can get for $48. $10,000 of net income is 60 days of full time work as an engineer. $48 is something I could could pay for collecting aluminum cans and plastic bottles, one day a month.

Are you with me on this? Are you starting to get an idea what ObamaCare is really about?

ObamaCare is not about dealing with inequities in the healthcare system. That's just the cover story. The real story is that it is a massive, political power grab. Do you think anyone who can insure himself with a premium policy for $4 a month will vote for anyone but the political party that provides him such a deal? ObamaCare is about enabling, subsizdizing, and expanding the Left's political power base, at taxpayer expense. Why would I vote for anyone but a Democrat if I can have babies for $4 a month? For that matter, why would I go to college or strive for a better job or income if it means I have to pay real money for healthcare coverage? Heck, why study engineering when I can be a schlub for $20K per year and buy a new F-150 with all the money I'm saving?

And think about those $4-a-month babies - think in terms of propagation models. Think of just how many babies will be born to irresponsible, under-educated mothers. Will we get a new crop of brain surgeons and particle physicists from the dollar baby club, or will we need more cops, criminal courts and prisons? One thing you can be certain of: At $4 a month, they'll multiply, and multiply, and multiply.

ObamaCare: It's all about political power.

Muslim Demographics. SCARY !

If you missed this piece when it appeared first a couple years ago you should take a 7-minute look at it.  I had posted it on the "Corner" when it first appeared, but with the recent Paris Islamic attack it is appropriate to give it a rerun. The theme of the video make it obvious that the French acquiescence to allow a 7.5% segment of its population to take over its own community as well as its administration.  A good lesson for well as to our "Closet Muslim" in the Oval Office.  I MISS RONNIE!!!!
(Full Screen it.)

Jan Morgan's Gun Range

Jan Morgan is facing controversy after declaring her business a “Muslim free
zone”   Her story below is a great short course in civics.
The owner of Gun Cave Indoor Shooting Range in Hot Springs, Ark. has drawn a line in the sand, and while critics will get angry they should read her reasons why. 

After the recent influx of violence perpetuated by self-proclaimed Islamists, Morgan began to study the religion and discovered “109 verses commanding hate, murder and terror against all human beings who refuse to submit or convert to Islam.”

On her website, Jan Morgan Media, Morgan, an investigative journalist and certified NRA gun instructor, explained that her decision was made based on facts.
Read her ten-point reasoning that has already provoked controversy:

"I officially declare my business, The Gun Cave Indoor Shooting Range, a MUSLIM FREE ZONE . . . "

1) The Koran, which I have read and studied thoroughly and (which all muslims align themselves with), contains 109 verses commanding hate, murder and terror against all human beings who refuse to submit or convert to Islam. Read those verses of violence here.

2) My life has been threatened repeatedly by muslims who are angry that I have studied their koran and have, over the past two years, been exposing the vileness of the Koran and its murderous directives.

3) * The barbaric act of beheading an innocent American in Oklahoma by a muslim

* the Boston bombings (by muslims)
* the Fort Hood mass shooting (by a muslim) that killed 13 people and injured over 30 people
* and the murder of 3000 innocent people (by muslims) on 9/11

This is more than enough loss of life on my home soil at the hands of muslims to substantiate my position that muslims can and will follow the directives in their Koran and kill here at home.

4) Because the nature of my business involves firearms and shooting firearms in an enclosed environment, my patrons are not comfortable being around muslims who align themselves with a religion that clearly commands hate, murder, and violence against all non muslims. Therefore many of my patrons are uncomfortable around Muslims with guns. (can you blame them?)

5) My range rents and sells guns to my patrons. Why would I want to rent or sell a gun and hand ammunition to someone who aligns himself with a religion that commands him to kill me?

6) * Muslims, who belong to and, or, support ISIS, are threatening to kill innocent Americans.
* Muslims, who belong to or support AL Qaeda, are threatening to kill innocent Americans.
* Muslims who belong to or support HAMAS are threatening to kill innocent Americans.

7) I not only have the right to refuse service but a RESPONSIBILITY to provide a safe environment for people to shoot and train on firearms. I can and have turned people away if I sense they are under the influence of alcohol or mind altering drugs. I have a federal firearms license…

The ATF informed us when we received the license that if we feel any reason for concern about selling someone a firearm, even sense that something is not right about an individual, or we are concerned about that persons mental state, even if they pass a background check, we do not have to sell that person a gun.

In other words, a federal agency has given us this kind of discretion for service based on the nature of the business. I can and have turned people away if I sense an issue with their mental state. So… its difficult to imagine how the DOJ could have issues with this when ATF gave us this discretion.

8) I have no way of looking at Islam other than as a theocracy, not a religion. Islam is undoubtedly the union of political, legal, and religious ideologies. In other words law, religion and state are forged together to form what Muslims refer to as “The Nation of Islam.” Once again it is given the sovereign qualities of a nation with clerics in the governing body and Sharia law all in one. This is a Theocracy, not a religion.

The US Constitution does not protect a theocracy. The 1st Amendment is very specific about protecting the rights of individuals from the government, as it concerns the practice of religions, not theocracies. It clearly differentiates between government and religion. Again protecting the individual’s religious beliefs and practices from (the state) government. In Islam, religion and state are one.

We are a Nation governed by laws, or the law of the land the U.S. Constitution. We are not a Nation that is governed by religion, politicians or clerics.

How then, can anyone say that, the practice of Islam is protected by the U.S. Constitution?

The Muslim brotherhood has a documented plan for the destruction of America from within, discovered by our own government during a raid of MB operatives in America. In addition, I am very cognizant of the civilization jihad under way in my country by American Muslims. In a number of states Muslims, through our legal system, are trying to force us to accept Sharia Law over Constitutional law. I do not wish to do business with people who stand against the Constitution and are fighting to replace it.

9) Islam allows Muslims to kill their own children, (honor killing) if the behavior of those children embarrasses or dishonors the family name. (did you know that dating outside of the faith is justification for murdering their daughters and this has already occurred on American soil?) Why would I want people (who believe it’s okay to murder their own children), be in the presence of other children? My patrons often bring their kids to the range to teach them to shoot. I am responsible for providing a safe environment for those children to learn gun safety and shooting sports.

10) In the 14 hundred year history of Islam, muslims have murdered over 270 million people. Not all muslims are terrorists, but almost all terrorists in the world right now are muslim. Since you can’t determine by visual assessment, which ones will kill you and which ones will not, I am going to go with the line of thought that ANY HUMAN BEING who would either knowingly or unknowingly support a “religion” that commands the murder of all people who refuse to submit or convert to that religion, is not someone I want to know or do business with. I hold adults accountable for the religion with which they align themselves.
In summary, I not only have the right, but a responsibility to provide a safe environment for my customers. I do not believe my decision is religious discrimination because I do not classify islam as a religion.. It is a theocracy/terrorist organization that hides behind the mask of religion in order to achieve its mission of world domination.

People who shoot at my range come from all religious backgrounds… some are atheists… I do not care about their religious beliefs. I care about the safety of my customers who come to shoot here. The government allows businesses to ban me from entering their business with my gun because the property owner feels uncomfortable or wants to provide a “safe” environment for their patrons which is in clear violation of my 2nd Amendment right to bear arms, so…

I should be able to deny service to people on the same premise. Can my government really force me to invite someone who had threatened to kill me, into my home or business?

I will do whatever is necessary to provide a safe environment for my customers, even at the cost of the increased threats and legal problems this decision will likely provoke.

Jan Morgan- Proprietor
"The Gun Cave Indoor Shooting Range"

Publisher's Note:     How about the entire USA Barack??? 

Political Correctness and Religious Arrogance, ….Evil Twins of Tragedy

from our Columbine Correspondent, Joe R.

I have no idea who Joe Facinoli is, so this in an online, unidentified piece.   I Googled the name...and there are far too many of the same name to extract any credentials or history.  It is very difficult to disagree with his remedies to our planetary challenges.

Ever since 9/11 I have been personally offended about the amount of support the USA has had from its supposed friendly allies in South American like Mexico.  Here we are trying to be a spear point in the war against terrorist Islamist...and all Mexico does is bitch about any filters on our borders that might keep out some intruders that might get a job and send the pesos back to Mexico.   No fighter jets, no security police, no ambulance drivers or even a few landscape gardeners to help clean up!!!  We do their dirty work for them while bad people wiggle through the wire with them.

Just imagine what a 90% Catholic country is going to suffer when an outfit like ISIS shows up in Acapulco and starts using the locals own machetes to behead them.  They might start having second thoughts about the Pope.

  Thank alot amigos!

By Joe Facinoli  (Whomever he may be.)

Opposites? Or born of the same womb, …and purpose??  You be the judge, …while we pay the price. 

On the one hand, …in the current era of social “enlightenment”, we are being told, taught, and fairly beaten into submission with the idea, that every person, religion, culture, and lifestyle which we might encounter, …should be treated with unquestioned respect and acquiescence, no matter how different, conflicting, disagreeable, and/or repulsive, …they may be to us.

Political Correctness run amok, …engrained in every part and morsel of our society and lives these days, …but run amok, nonetheless.

On the other hand, we are told by every major religion and belief system, in one fashion or another, that their “God” is the only God, and that all who do not believe this basic tenet are, …well, …frankly less human, less entitled to any benefits attached to same, and certainly, …lesser in the eyes of “God”.

Religious Arrogance at its finest, …or worst, …and it’s been this way for many millennia.

Polar opposites by definition, …these two societal scourges and pariahs, …but they are joined at the hip, and irrevocably intertwined, …by their subversively evil natures.

One says that we must accept all who appear before us, …and not only allow these fellow travelers whatever life decisions they might have made, but then accommodate and include those same choices into our own lives, …regardless of our own beliefs.

And for good measure, the core principle of Political Correctness is that we should never speak, nor act disparagingly of anyone’s heritage, choices, and/or beliefs, …in even the slightest way.

In fact, we should never go so far as to even imply that we do not agree with, nor that we might not accept anything, that any other person, …anywhere, might do, believe, say, …or be.

PC has spoken, so you’d best take heed, …and pay careful attention.

For it has been dictated, that we shall go through life wearing soft, velvet kid gloves, …and treat everyone in it like they were the most fragile of eggs, ready to break at the first trivial word, or delicate provocation.

But on the opposite side, all the world’s major religions tell any who will listen that if you don’t believe in them, then you don’t matter, …and that you are surely destined to rot in whatever Hell they have concocted, if you don’t shape up and get with their program.

Too many of them go even further, telling all in earshot, (whether they care to listen or not), that they will be punished right here on this Good Earth, …should they choose not to leave the “dark side”, and capitulate to the beliefs of the “One and Only Way”.

And over the centuries, each and every one of these theologies and liturgies has spent considerable time and effort “convincing” their non-believers, …that they should.

They have waded through our lives, and history, wearing heavy leather gloves, wrapped around a sledge hammer, as a way of “reminding” us that we are all heathens and sinners, unless we believe their way.

The millions who have lost their lives, in this ridiculous pursuit, …attest to this.

It’s the worst possible kind of cultural pairing, …these two “philosophies”.

A few strong and brutal groups of killers (and worse), in the name of a brutal and condescending religion, …pillaging and plundering their way through all society, for some arbitrary, man-made god (as they all are, really), whose instructions seem to include whatever the loyal “followers” want them to say.

But yet, at once, these offenders are made credible and untouchable, by the creed which says we cannot judge, muchless punish nor prevent, these hideous (and worse) actions and practices, for fear we might not understand them, nor judge fairly.

The fatal and tragic definition of a “Catch-22”.

Which always, …and especially given our present cultural and political choices, …means: No Way to Win.

Bringing us to present day Islam, …and to Paris, which followed Sydney, and Madrid, and London, and so many mass murders of non-followers and non-believers, and poison gas in subways, and beheadings on camera, and machine gunnings of journalists and cartoonists, …and so much individual torture, and cultural suffering.

And of course, ….9/11.

It’s not going to get better, …not for a very long time. Not until the world’s leaders decide to stop talking, and posturing, and condemning, and preaching, …and start acting like leaders, …in the best interest of those who chose them to lead.

Holding the same old tedious and tiresome marches, even millions strong, without true and focused action connected to it, …means nothing.

We need leaders like Reagan, and Thatcher, …again. And those of the “Greatest Generation”, …not so long ago.

There are ways to deal with this threat of “radical” Islam, however it originated, and from wherever it comes.

We’ve done it already, …in World War II.

Seems like a long time ago, but the principles are the same today. Almost no one has the courage to do it, however, …worrying too much about “collateral damage”, and political “fallout”.

But we are truly in the same place now, as when Hitler, and Japan, seemed to be unstoppable, and had all the leverage on us.

We let them get to that point then, by political inaction, and capitulation, and “appeasement”, before the world finally had had enough, and agreed that they must be stopped, …at all costs.

And that’s where we are now, again, …no matter what the world’s leaders pontificate. These “extremists” will stop at nothing, and as we have seen, actually want to become martyrs for their god, for their cause, and for all its self-serving teachings.

Think massive troop strength advantages, brutal recriminations, and unmerciful pursuit and “disposal” of these supposed extremists.

They neither know, nor understand, any other way.Islam is not a country, and there are 1.6 billion practicing Muslims in the world, but if each despicable, unholy event they do is met with something worse, then sooner or later, the tide will turn.

Those who live by the sword, especially at the behest of some false and ruthless god, truly need to be dealt with by the same harsh sword. Until all who live that way are gone, or have seen the light of living as a civilization.

A lot of innocents will die, …but it needs to be done this way. They have forced our hand, …and we have let them take us to the unfortunate place where we now find ourselves. More “innocents” are dying every day, …anyway. We cannot keep on giving in to them, and blaming brave writers for “going too far”, or “provoking” them, …when they poke fun at, or tell the truth about this religion, its holy book, and the deity who supposedly inspired it.

Only Israel today has the guts to take the actions necessary.

We all need to follow their lead, or else we will soon be following the dictates of some others, …who, …I can assure you, will NOT be as polite, friendly, …nor civilized.

Legal semantics blunt sane strategy -

 Because of the deadly threat posed by Western jihadists carrying out attacks on the homeland, it’s time to strip U.S. citizenship from those who enlist in militant groups: 

The law currently provides that Americans can lose citizenship when they enter or serve in the armed forces of an enemy foreign state. But ISIS and al Qaeda are not “foreign states,” so the law doesn’t apply. 

Stripping citizenship and revoking passports represent just two small steps – but critical ones – towards a sane national security strategy. However, it’s difficult to take even these small steps with the Obama Administration steadfastly refuses to name our enemies.

Mr. President, our enemies are Islamic radicals, not generic extremists.  You should step out of your destructive role of the International Liar and accurately describe their ideology.  This hearkens back to your claim last summer that the Islamic State is not Islamic because its conduct doesn’t reflect the values of the faith and not really a state, either.  How fricking stupid can you be, and what is worse, how stupid do you think WE are.


Meet Barack Hussein Obama's appointment for an immigration position.

Obama Appointment Fatima Noor Asst Director for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration. Really?? If you are not concerned, people, you sure should be...see a pattern here? You get what you vote for. Or if you don't vote, like so many Americans, you get what others vote for. It's Americans' lack of voter participation that has gotten us where we are today.  

Fatima Noor will be a special assistant in the Office of the Director for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services in the Department of Homeland Noor was appointed in July of 2014 to serves as a special assistant in the Office of
You can go to for more.  Definitely, only question is "what kind ?"  Not politically correct to make any kind of pre-judgement.  Lot of bloggers have jumped on this for obvious reasons.  Citizenship? Own any weapons?  Any travel to Yemen or Somali lately?  We may never know until we hear the explosion!


CHARLESTON, W.VA.     West Virginia is reeling from a political earthquake.

--  The last Republican to serve as speaker of the state House of Delegates, John William Cummins, left office 84 years ago. That was also the last time that both houses of the Mountain State’s legislature were in Republican control. (By comparison, the U.S. House has changed hands eight times over the same span.) So despite trending Republican on the federal level for 14 years, few here believed that things would really change on the state level. But as the freshly stenciled doors attest, that’s exactly what will happen on Wednesday. And while the change is breathtaking on the state level, West Virginia is just one part of the biggest political story almost no one is talking about.

The GOP now controls more state legislative chambers than at any point in the party’s history: 68 out of 98 partisan state legislative chambers, up from 59 prior to the 2014 cycle. And while West Virginia still has a Democratic governor, 23 states have Republican chief executives and GOP-controlled legislatures compared to just seven for Democrats. And while much of that is a function of dismal years nationally for Democrats in 2010 and 2014, it also reflects a sea change in Republican thinking after the 2008 presidential election, when states began to matter to a party that had been almost singularly focused on the White House for three generations.

After the back-to-back beatings the party took in 2006 and 2008, the Republican State Leadership Committee and other groups like GOPAC and the he Redistricting Majority Project got deadly serious about winning on the state level. 

The goal, laid out by party leaders like former RNC Chairman Ed Gillespie, was to build a ground-up party as opposed to the prior Republican approach of trickle-down political prosperity. Given the clout of government worker unions in state politics, Democrats had ridden out Republican waves of the past secure in their state-level primacy. They could draw the new congressional maps, develop candidates and organize for the next cycle and advance their preferred policies. But after President Obama’s win, Republicans decided it was time for payback. 

While Democrats shoveled everything they had at keeping the White House, they got swamped on the state level. That money and organization, combined with the new phalanx of energetic first-time office seekers spurred by outrage over Obama’s agenda, proved unstoppable.

The Republican success hasn’t just been in swing and red states. Republicans now control 31 governorships, including deep-blue states of Massachusetts, Maryland and Illinois. Republicans control legislative bodies in Nevada, Maine, Minnesota, New Mexico and New Hampshire. And, those defeats came after Democrats had tried to get back on offense in 2014, but mostly failed. 

As the National Council of State Legislatures reported “The GOP’s November landslide gave the party control of both chambers in 30 states, the most since 1920. Republicans bagged 11 formerly Democratic chambers and gained roughly 290 new House and Senate seats for control of about 4,100 of the nation’s 7,383 legislative seats.” (Statescape has the breakdown by state and party here.)

And like many of the 29 other state legislatures that are beginning legislative sessions under Republican control this winter, West Virginia lawmakers are preparing a nightmarish list of legislation for Democrats. New restrictions on late-term abortion, tax cuts and regulatory rollbacks are all part of the plan, but so too are measures aimed at breaking up the still-potent collaboration between government worker unions, trial lawyers and the Democratic party. When Republicans here talk about tort reform and changes to union power similar to those that have already been put place in states like Wisconsin, Michigan and Indiana, they are talking about cutting off the multi-generation revenue stream for the Democratic Party.

While West Virginia Democrats say they are confident they can retake at least the House and retain the governorship in 2016 – “Nothing could be worse than Obama was for us,” one longtime Democratic lawmaker told Fox News First -- the realization here is like it is in much of the country: Republicans have figured out how to pull the plug on the Democratic power source, and that means big trouble.

Islamic Terrorism by Any Other Name …

More than a million people turned out. More than 40 presidents and prime ministers were there. It was, as the New York Times reported, “the most striking show of solidarity in the West against the threat of Islamic extremism since the Sept. 11 attacks.”

But President Obama did not go to Paris. Neither did Joe Biden. Or John Kerry. Attorney General Eric Holder was in the city but he didn’t go to the rally either.

No one does a better job than Bernie Goldberg when it come to analyzing the stupidity of Barack Obama.  He does not pull punches and his penetrating political insight into the arrogant edifice of idiocy is unequaled.  Read his full story clicking  HERE

Our Beloved Leader.

Kim Jung Un had NO military experience whatsoever before Daddy made him a four-star general.  This snot-nosed twerp had never accomplished anything in his life that would even come close to military leadership. He hadn't even so much as led a Cub Scout troop, coached a sports team, or commanded a military platoon. So he is made the "Beloved Leader" Of North Korea.   Terrific!!!

I'm sorry.

I just remembered that we did the same thing.

We took an arrogant phony community organizer, who had never worn a uniform, and made him Commander-in-Chief.

A guy, who had never had a real job, worked on a budget, or led anything more than an ACORN demonstration, and army of speech writers, a teleprompter and we made him "Beloved Leader" of the United States.

                                                     TWICE !!!  How dumb can you get ??
.                            Never mind.                     I'm sorry I brought this up . .. 

The Last Keystone Excuse

  "The only reason Mr. Obama hasn't  given for his opposition is the real one: His environmental supporters (aka. contributors) oppose the pipeline as a matter of climate-change religious faith. They include influential donors like billionaire Tom Steyer who have turned Keystone into a litmus test of environmental purity."    

The Nebraska court decision means Obama is out of fig leaves.

For six years President Obama has used one pretext after another to avoid approving the Keystone XL pipeline. Now the Nebraska Supreme Court has blown up his last excuse, and the President owes it to the country to either say yes or to come clean about his anti-fossil fuel politics.

Nebraska’s top court on Friday upheld a state law giving the Governor authority to review and approve major pipeline projects. The ruling ended litigation brought by a trio of Nebraska landowners who claimed Governor Dave Heineman ’s 2013 approval of the Keystone route through his state was unconstitutional. The litigation was the latest reason the Administration had concocted—raising it in April—for again delaying a Keystone decision.
And we mean only the latest. TransCanada filed with the State Department for a cross-border permit while Mr. Obama was still running for President. Mr. Obama has since subjected the project to two separate State Department reviews, ignoring the positive findings of both. Even as the Nebraska court ruled, the White House on Friday was back with more delay, claiming the State Department now needs to review the court decision and ponder, ponder, ponder.
This week Mr. Obama welcomed the 114th Congress by threatening to veto a bill to approve the pipeline if it passes Congress. The House moved foward anyway on Friday, passing the approval bill 266 to 153, including ayes from 28 Democrats. The Senate will open debate on its bipartisan version next week, and it already has enough support to break a liberal filibuster.
This debate and Mr. Obama’s veto decision are going to be clarifying moments for the Democratic Party. We’ll see if it’s the party of jobs and the working stiff, as Democrats claim, or of rich green donors who put obsessions about possible future climate change above the well-being of Americans in the here and now.

O'Reilly on Fox

Probably a bunch of you are O'Reilly watchers on Fox News...but have been robbed by the Fox/DishTv squabble....which is very much like our Congress.  It is actually un-American to not have a voice other than mainstream media.  I have done without Fox for weeks can understand better the vast barren wasteland for those who are forced to live only with the MSM.
                              Click      HERE  for an O'Reilly talking point.